https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65380
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to milan.plzik from comment #17)
> with gcc 5.2.0, I still get this error when e.g. compiling ChibiOS example:
> $ make
> Linking build/ch.elf
> lto1: internal compiler error: in add_symbol_to_parti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I will have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68591
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Just a random guess - it might be that TM uses TREE_ADDRESSABLE in some ways
to detect non-aliased memory (may_be_aliased?) But of course you don't need
aliasing (pointers) to get multi-thread conflicts.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68592
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
--- Comment #15 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Andi Kleen from comment #14)
> I'm building a current Linux kernel with allyesconfig, and this new warning
> causes
> 1383(!) new warnings in the build.
>
> I think this should be revisited and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68585
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 30 08:24:06 2015
New Revision: 231058
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231058&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-30 Richard Biener
PR c/68162
* dwarf2out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
--- Comment #2 from R. Diez ---
A setting like LIBSTDCXX_EMERGENCY_EH_POOL_SIZE sounds good. However, an
environment variable will not help me, it has to be a configuration option when
building the toolchain. I am writing embedded firmware with n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
--- Comment #17 from Andi Kleen ---
There were a few false or useless ones (e.g. related to macros and specific
build configs). I didn't look through them all, but various were semi
legitimate, but also very minor (small) so fixing it won't help
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46032
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015, rdiezmail-gcc at yahoo dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68606
>
> --- Comment #2 from R. Diez ---
> A setting like LIBSTDCXX_EMERGENCY_EH_POOL_SI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28901
--- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Here is an example:
...
static const struct pt_regs_offset x86_32_regoffset_table[] = {
REG_OFFSET_NAME_32("%ax", eax),
REG_OFFSET_NAME_32("%cx", ecx),
REG_OFFSET_NA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68379
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68379
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.3 |5.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
I'll wait for after GCC 5.3 for the backport.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28115
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Nov 30 09:43:55 2015
New Revision: 231059
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231059&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/28115
* config/sparc/sparc.c (supersparc_adj
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68603
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68577
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53927
pmderodat at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68600
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68615
Bug ID: 68615
Summary: Unhelpful location when missing a semi-colon on a
function declaration at the end of a header
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68463
iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68577
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Created attachment 36870
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36870&action=edit
proposed patch
Here's the patch I'm testing. Adding the cost of the demotion
prevents vectorisa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59298
--- Comment #6 from Adam Hirst ---
As with another bug I keep in my Bookmarks, I just decided to check this again
and it seems that in 5.2.0 we're still getting the same behaviour.
$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gfortran
COLLECT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68526
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Not sure how this changed with the code but this is <= folding into == and then
(simplify
(eq @0 @0)
(if (! FLOAT_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0))
|| ! HONOR_NANS (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (@0
{ constant_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
So I'd say we should do
Index: gcc/tree.c
===
--- gcc/tree.c (revision 231058)
+++ gcc/tree.c (working copy)
@@ -3344,10 +3344,6 @@
t = b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68379
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
The PR68614 testcase
int a, b[3], c[3][5];
void
fn1 ()
{
int e;
for (a = 2; a >= 0; a--)
for (e = 0; e < 4; e++)
c[a][e] = b[a];
}
exposes the same issue in basic-block vectorization. We fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68592
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68463
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015, iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68463
>
> iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68616
Bug ID: 68616
Summary: miscompilation in multi-threaded code
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68617
Bug ID: 68617
Summary: arm ice output_operand: invalid %-code for
-march=armv6k + thumb
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68534
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 30 13:33:27 2015
New Revision: 231072
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231072&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-30 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/68534
* decl.c (gfc_ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68617
--- Comment #1 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36872
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36872&action=edit
reproduce
compiled with arm-none-eabi-gcc -Os -S -mfloat-abi=softfp
attr-unaligned-load-ice.c -mtp=s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68617
--- Comment #2 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
unaligned_access flag now depend on TARGET_32BIT, which is sensitive to the
attribute target.
Should be made Save in arm.opt and handled in override_options_internal. But
this is still not enough to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68618
Bug ID: 68618
Summary: interrupt fails on ICE in some call cases with miamcu
with -O2/3
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68619
Bug ID: 68619
Summary: error: loop with header 6 not in loop tree
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68616
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68616
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68619
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68619
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68474
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Instead it originates from
>
> (for cmp (ge le)
>
> (simplify
>
> (cmp @0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68577
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36870|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68600
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68619
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68620
Bug ID: 68620
Summary: ICE on gcc.target/arm/attr-neon-fp16.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68592
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 30 14:50:48 2015
New Revision: 231074
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231074&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/68592
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68592
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
> > Instead it originates from
> >
> > (for cmp (ge le)
> >
> > (simplify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68501
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 30 14:56:08 2015
New Revision: 231075
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231075&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/68501
* target.def (builtin_reciproca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68501
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> So, either we should keep what used to be in _Bool/bool type in scalar code
> as 0/-1 at all spots, or as 0/1 at all spots, or as non-zero vs. zero, but
> choose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68590
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
The following avoids the issue in this PR
Index: gcc/match.pd
===
--- gcc/match.pd(revision 231065)
+++ gcc/match.pd(working c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68618
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
--- Comment #7 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Right, scalar value needs to be adjusted before building a vector. This patch
should resolve the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
index 687f982..6e4b046 100644
--- a/gcc/tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68621
Bug ID: 68621
Summary: [5 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ifc-8.c
scan-tree-dump-times ifcvt "Applying if-conversion" 1
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68621
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|[5 Regression] F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68595
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That LGTM, but please let richi review it on gcc-patches if it works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68622
Bug ID: 68622
Summary: initialization of atomic objects emits unnecessary
fences
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68116
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46032
--- Comment #23 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Nov 30 16:34:26 2015
New Revision: 231076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle BUILT_IN_GOMP_PARALLEL in ipa-pta
2015-11-30 Tom de Vr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68021
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46032
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68603
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Arnez ---
Right, the regression is caused by r230979 -- sorry about that. I've posted a
suggested fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg03502.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to bin.cheng from comment #7)
> Hmm, this issue could be simply because chrec_fold_multiply doesn't use
> sizetype as CHREC_RIGHT's type to build pointer type CHREC:
>
> return build_polyno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67778
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63870
--- Comment #14 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Mon Nov 30 17:11:16 2015
New Revision: 231077
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231077&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-11-30 Charles Baylis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63870
cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68623
Bug ID: 68623
Summary: lra doesn't check predicate after reloading an early
clobber
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68619
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68618
Yulia Koval changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68540
--- Comment #8 from Martin Reinecke ---
I confirm that I can build again when provoding the ISL 0.15 sources withon the
gcc/ directory.
In order to save others some head-scratching, would it be possible to update
the ISL version check in the con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68565
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Pop ---
Author: spop
Date: Mon Nov 30 20:39:16 2015
New Revision: 231086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
check for ISL generated code that leads to division by zero
we used to gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68565
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68403
--- Comment #8 from Bill Schmidt ---
Verified that the powerpc64le failures are gone as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68358
--- Comment #11 from Nenad Vukicevic ---
On 11/24/2015 3:27 PM, iains at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> OK so it appears that we do have two issues;
>
> 1. that we're (incorrectly) calling dsymutil for "link only" cases where
> there's no LTO involved
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68358
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Based on some checking on older systems I think that Apple switched to
> llvm-dsymutil (part of LLVM source) on El Capitan. Not sure about
> Yosemite. I tried darwin10's dsymutil and it does NOT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65198
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151130 (experimental) [trunk revision 231056] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -m64 -Os small.c; ./a.out
$ gcc-trunk -m32 -O2 small.c; ./a.out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68612
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Regueiro ---
Okay, I see. Going through the C Standards Committee is a very long,
bureaucratic, and fraught process – as I'm sure you're aware. Is there any
reason you wouldn't consider adding this as an extension to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68604
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68625
Bug ID: 68625
Summary: [6 Regression] Segmentation fault in
useless_type_conversion_p
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68477
--- Comment #2 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Dec 1 04:45:53 2015
New Revision: 231096
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231096&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/68477
* go-gcc.cc (Gcc_backend::string_consta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68477
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68477
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68626
Bug ID: 68626
Summary: Compiling with "-flto -fuse-linker-plugin" gives
libtool error
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68626
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
> This can be fixed by using NM="gcc-nm", but as binutils was compiled with lto
> enabled, it shouldn't be required?
Do you have the linker plugin in the correct location for ld/nm to find it?
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
